Skip to content
GitLab
Menu
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Help
Support
Community forum
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in
Toggle navigation
Menu
Open sidebar
Giuseppe Castagna
occurrencetyping
Commits
26fbc9c0
Commit
26fbc9c0
authored
Jul 10, 2019
by
Giuseppe Castagna
Browse files
rewording
parent
082e483e
Changes
5
Show whitespace changes
Inline
Sidebyside
conclusion.tex
View file @
26fbc9c0
...
...
@@ 68,6 +68,6 @@ positive branch the types of $x_1$, of $x_2$, and of $x_1x_2$ by applying $\sigm
idea is clear (see Appendix~
\ref
{
app:roadmap
}
for a more detailed explanation),
the technical details are quite involved, especially when considering
functions typed by intersection types and/or when integrating gradual
typing. This
deserve
s a whole
pan
of non trivial research that we plan to
typing. This
need
s a whole
gamut
of non trivial research that we plan to
develop in the near future.
gradual.tex
View file @
26fbc9c0
...
...
@@ 92,7 +92,7 @@ other words, if a function expects an argument of type $\tau$ but can be
typed under the hypothesis that the argument has type
$
\tauUp
$
, then no casts
are needed, since every cast that succeeds will be a subtype of
$
\tauUp
$
. Taking advantage of this property, we modify the rule for
functions as:
functions as:
\vspace
{
2mm
}
%
%\begin{mathpar}
% \Infer[Abs]
...
...
@@ 115,7 +115,7 @@ functions as:
}
{
\Gamma\vdash\lambda
x:
\sigma
'.e:
\textstyle\bigwedge
_{
(
\sigma
,
\tau
)
\in
T
}
\sigma\to
\tau
}
}
\vspace
{

2
mm
}
\]
The main idea behind this rule is the same as before: we first collect all the
information we can into
$
\psi
$
by analyzing the body of the function. We then
...
...
practical.tex
View file @
26fbc9c0
...
...
@@ 17,7 +17,7 @@ function but not whether it has a specific function type (\emph{cf.}, Footnote~\
implementation becomes complete (see Corollary~
\ref
{
app:completeness
}
in the appendix for a formal proof).
Our implementation is written in OCaml and uses CDuce as a library to
provide the semantic sub

typing machinery. Besides a typechecking
provide the semantic subtyping machinery. Besides a typechecking
algorithm defined on the base language, our implementation supports
record types (Section
\ref
{
ssec:struct
}
) and the refinement of function types
(Section
\ref
{
sec:refining
}
with the rule of Appendix~
\ref
{
app:optimize
}
). The implementation is rather crude and
...
...
@@ 25,8 +25,12 @@ consist of 2000 lines of OCaml code, including parsing, typechecking
of programs, and pretty printing of types. We demonstrate the output of
our typechecking implementation in Table~
\ref
{
tab:implem
}
. These
examples and others can be tested in the online toplevel available at
\url
{
https://occtyping.github.io/
}
(the corresponding repository is
\url
{
https://occtyping.github.io/
}
%
\ifsubmission
~(the corresponding repository is
anonymized).
\else
.
\fi
\input
{
code
_
table
}
In this table, the second column gives a code fragment and the third
column the type deduced by our implementation. Code~1 is a
...
...
@@ 70,8 +74,8 @@ parameter by \Bool{} (which in CDuce is syntactic sugar for
\True
$
\vee
$
\False
) yielding the type
$
(
\True
{
\to
}
\False
)
\wedge
(
\False
{
\to
}
\True
)
$
.
The
\texttt
{
or
\_
}
connective (Code~5) is straightforward as far as the
code goes, but we see that the overloaded type precisely capture all
the
possible cases. Again we use a generalized version of the
code goes, but we see that the overloaded type precisely capture
s
all
possible cases. Again we use a generalized version of the
\texttt
{
or
\_
}
connective that accepts and treats any value that is not
\texttt
{
true
}
as
\texttt
{
false
}
and again, we could easily restrict the
domain to
\Bool
{}
if desired.
...
...
related.tex
View file @
26fbc9c0
...
...
@@ 33,7 +33,7 @@ Section~\ref{sec:practical}. Second, in our setting, {\em types\/} play
the role of formulæ. Using settheoretic types, we can express the
complex types of variables without resorting to a metalogic. This
allows us to type all but two of their key examples (the notable
exceptions being Example~8 and 14 which use the propagation of type
exceptions being Example~8 and 14
in their paper,
which use the propagation of type
information outside of the branches of a test). Also, while they
extend their core calculus with pairs, they only provide a simple
{
\tt
cons?
}
predicate that allows them to test whether some value is a
...
...
setup.sty
View file @
26fbc9c0
...
...
@@ 59,7 +59,7 @@
\newcommand
{
\Rule
}
[1]
{
[
\textsc
{
#1
}
]
}
\newcommand
{
\tcase
}
[4]
{
\ensuremath
{
(#1
{
\in
}
#2)
\,\texttt
{
\textup
{
?
}}
\,
#3
\,\texttt
{
\textup
{
:
}}
\,
#4
}}
\newcommand
{
\morecompact
}{
\baselineskip
=
2.8
pt
}
\newcommand
{
\morecompact
}{
\baselineskip
=
9.5
pt
}
\newcommand
{
\tauUp
}{
\tau
^
\Uparrow
}
\newcommand
{
\sigmaUp
}{
\sigma
^
\Uparrow
}
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment